In response to a petition filed on the White House We the People site, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy on Friday released a policy memorandum (PDF) supporting free public access to the results of federally-funded research. The policy mandates that, within six months, “each Federal agency with over $100 million in annual conduct of research and development expenditures…develop a [draft] plan to support increased public access to the results of research funded by the Federal Government.” Of particular interest to librarians and other information professionals, required features of the draft agency plans include “a strategy for improving the public’s ability to locate and access digital data resulting from federally funded scientific research” and “an approach for optimizing search, archival, and dissemination features that encourages innovation in accessibility and interoperability, while ensuring long-term stewardship of the results of federally funded research.”

Meanwhile, legislation recently introduced in Congress (H.R. 708) calls on federal agencies “to develop public access policies relating to research conducted by employees of that agency or from funds administered by that agency.” The bill is commonly called the FASTR bill, short for “Fair Access to Science and Technology Research.”

Open access expert Peter Suber succinctly describes the key differences between the White House policy and the legislation–and explains why he welcomes both–in his Google+ post Second shoe drops: new White House Directive mandates OA.

While the bill may or may not pass, the directive is already in force. How will this affect your work? Let us know in the comments.

The Library and Archives Canada (LAC) and other federal libraries and information services are facing severe cuts. Details from the Canadian Library Association (CLA) press release, 2 May 2012:

At Library and Archives Canada, 430 people have been given notices, with more than 200 jobs to be cut over the next three years, representing a reduction of 20% of their workforce. They have also had to cut their acquisitions budget, end their role in national inter-library loan activities, and cut the National Archival Development Program, which has provided funding to Canadian archival organizations to increase their capacity to preserve archival materials and make them available to Canadians. These cuts will negatively impact Library and Archives Canada’s ability to provide front-line services, resulting in reduced access to information for Canadians. …

CLA has also received reports that many libraries in federal government departments will be losing staff; some will be shuttering their libraries altogether. Not only does this result in less support for departmental staff and researchers to access relevant information; but as many of these libraries also provide direct services to the public, Canadians will be prevented from having access to that information. Affected departments identified so far include Agriculture Canada, Citizenship and Immigration Canada, Industry Canada, the National Capital Commission, National Defence, Public Works and Government Services, the Public Service Commission, and Transport Canada. Earlier this year, Human Resources and Skills Development Canada had already announced their intention to close that department’s library.

Canadian archivists plan to protest the cuts with an “On to Ottawa Trek” on 28 May 2012. For details, see: http://archiviststrek2012.tumblr.com/

Check the CLA Government Library and Information Management Professionals Network blog for more information and news updates.

Canadian government librarians, please feel free to comment on this post with additional information.

Congratulations to librarian Robbie LaFleur, director of the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library. Robbie was recognized by the National Conference of State Legislatures with a 2011 Legislative Staff Achievement Award. The awards were announced at the recent NCSL annual conference and described in NCSL’s 11 August press release.

#SocialCongress: Perceptions and Use of Social Media on Capitol Hill is “the first research into Congressional staffers’ attitudes about their offices’ use of social media” and was released this week by the Congressional Management Foundation. The report is the second in a series based on research undertaken among Congressional staff in late 2010.

In the report, the authors state that “the use of social media is transformative, changing the tone, speed, and nature of the democratic dialogue.” However, staff opinions differ as to the importance and value of newer communication tools.

On the “pro” side, fans appreciate how online media are helping reach constituents who were not being reached before. Because e-media are less expensive, they help offices deliver a better reach to a broader audience. Younger staffers are more certain than senior staff (those over age 50) of the benefits of using social media and the ability of the office to “control the message” on the social media. Staff in offices charactertized as early adopters also tend to believe the social media make members of Congress more responsive and accountable to their constituents.

In contrast, a high proportion (77%) of staff from offices characterized as late adopters said that email and the internet have caused staff to worry more about information being leaked prematurely or being taken out of context. Staff in late adopting offices were less likely to believe the office has the expertise or the time to manage social media.

Study results also showed a lack of agreement on whether social media make for more or less meaningful constituent interaction. Those most directly involved in social media communications (e.g., social media managers) were more likely to have a positive view, as compared with senior managers and staff who interact with constituents using more traditional forms of communication (email, letters, etc.).

The report also compares staff opinions of the value of specific traditional and online outreach tools such as in-person, telephone, and online community meetings, member blogs, Facebook, and Twitter. For example, 12% of senior managers and social media managers (N=138) believed Twitter was “very important” for communicating with constituents, and another 39% considered Twitter “somewhat important.” The authors note that Twitter has “further penetrated Capitol Hill” since the data were collected.

A manager remarked that a lot of time is spent worrying about the message rather than the medium, and that social media tools may not be getting the attention they deserve. Most respondents believe their offices should be spending more time on communications including social media.

Overall, do Congressional staff think social media communications are worth the time spent? Only 32% of staff in late-adopting offices say yes, in contrast with 77% of staff from the early adopters. It could be interesting to revisit these results after future election cycles to examine any correlations between outreach methods used and penetration of messages that make a difference to voters.

The US Department of Justice (DOJ) has just made a collection of 28 federal legislative histories available online at USDOJ: Legislative Histories. The histories were researched and compiled by DOJ librarians and have previously been available only in the department’s main library.

In their guide to the topic, the Law Librarians’ Society of Washington, DC (LLSDC) describes federal legislative histories as “compilations of documents related to a specific U.S. public law that precede the law’s enactment.” LLSDC also has a guide to finding legislative histories online from both government and commercial sources: Legislative Histories of Selected U.S. Laws on the Internet.

The Advisory Committee on Transparency, a project of the nonpartisan Sunlight Foundation, set the stage for their 9 May 2011 program on the Congressional Research Service (CRS):

CRS director Dan Mulhollan’s retirement on April 2 – after running Congress’ think tank for 17 years – raises questions about the agency’s policies and future.

Is CRS meeting the needs of Congress? Has its analytical expertise eroded? Are CRS Reports as relevant, accurate, and understandable as they need to be, and should they be available to the general public? What does a 21st century research service look like?

A video recording of the full 1.5 hour panel discussion is available from the CSPAN Video Library at http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/ResearchS. The Nextgov news site summarizes the panel’s discussion of CRS report availability in the article Sunshine advocates say Congressional Research Service reports should be posted online. U.S. Representative Mike Quigley (D-IL) is expected to introduce legislation on the availability of CRS reports later this month.

A new guide to searching the 50 public domain U.S. state legislation databases is available online for free, courtesy of the Prevention Research Center at the Brown School of Social Work in St. Louis, Missouri.

The 2011 State Legislative Search Guide, according to an email announcing its publication, “compiles hyperlinks, navigation directions, contacts for questions, search tips, and information for each of the 50 state legislative websites.” The Center offers both a full-length guide with an introduction plus a guide page on each state and a two-page guide with links to each state legislature’s homepage and its bill search page. (Note: the Law Librarians Society of Washington DC also has an online quick guide called State Legislatures, State Laws, and State Regulations: Website Links and Telephone Numbers.)

Standard information for each state in the Center’s full guide includes:

• date range covered
• intructions for bill search, bill tracking, and statute searching
• general search tips, including how revisions to a bill’s text are indicated
• general notes such as legislative session length, special features of the database, and changes made since 2009 when the Center last reviewed the sites

SLA/DGI members may also be interested in a Center project described in their Spring 2011 newsletter, Cancer Control Dissemination Research among State-Level Policymakers: Insight into how legislators gather and use information.

A new video from the U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO) explains the work that goes on at night to deliver the Congressional Record in print and online the next morning. The Production of the Congressional Record video (4 min, 51 sec) is on GPO’s YouTube channel along with other informative presentations on GPO’s work and products.

The GPO’s 9 May 2011 press release announcing the video explains one of the major points GPO would like to make:

Technology changes over the past generation have reduced the cost of this publication by more than
two thirds, and today the vast majority of the cost to produce it — nearly 70% — is in the creation of the digital file for dissemination online and in print.

From the SLA Public Policy Connections blog, Organizations ask for the Reintroduction of Legislation to Access CRS Reports, 5 April 2011:

More than 35 organizations, including SLA, signed letters sent to the U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, the U.S. House Oversight and Government Reform, and the U.S. Legislative Branch Appropriations Subcommittee Members, asking that legislation be swiftly reintroduced authorizing and encouraging the public distribution of reports that are published by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). …

Read letter to Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
Read letter to House Oversight and Government Reform Committee
Read letter to Legislative Branch Appropriations Subcommittee Members

Read the full blog post for details.